OFFICIAL: Nine out of ten teams have been found to be compliant with the 2024 budget cap. Only one procedural violation was identified for Aston, which did not exceed the maximum cost limit. All five power unit manufacturers are compliant. #AutoRacer #F1
You won't, he didn't make one.
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2025/10 ... palo-alto/The other big news since Mexico is that the Cost Cap rumours regarding possible breaches have gone away. The word in the F1 Paddock for a couple of weeks has been that there was a problem with Mercedes AMG Petronas. In the end, nothing has happened. This is interesting. No teams deliberately breaks the F1 budget cap. In order for a breach to significantly impact performance, it would require a lot of money and the risk of punishment means it is not worth doing. More importantly reputational damage particularly for manufacturers is a big issue. Everyone errs on the side of caution. The rumours, which have been discussed quietly since Singapore, are based on the fact that there is still a level of interpretation of the Cost Cap rules. It is not clear why this is still happening and there is no transparency on these matters.
It's a farce IF there was something suspicious and have been dealt with behind closed doors. Especially considering how rival teams and media handled it last time.AR3-GP wrote: ↑29 Oct 2025, 20:20I think the lack of transparency is poor. If Mercedes was in trouble, they would have wielded every tool in their arsenal to get out of it, I have no doubt. So I don't think the budget cap works if you can't actually trust that some teams could weasel their way out of trouble.
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2025/10 ... palo-alto/The other big news since Mexico is that the Cost Cap rumours regarding possible breaches have gone away. The word in the F1 Paddock for a couple of weeks has been that there was a problem with Mercedes AMG Petronas. In the end, nothing has happened. This is interesting. No teams deliberately breaks the F1 budget cap. In order for a breach to significantly impact performance, it would require a lot of money and the risk of punishment means it is not worth doing. More importantly reputational damage particularly for manufacturers is a big issue. Everyone errs on the side of caution. The rumours, which have been discussed quietly since Singapore, are based on the fact that there is still a level of interpretation of the Cost Cap rules. It is not clear why this is still happening and there is no transparency on these matters.
It's always someone's interpretation of what's happening, based on a limited amount of data. Just because someone is jumping to conclusions — especially media types who benefit from the hype — doesn't mean anyone has done anything wrong.lio007 wrote: ↑29 Oct 2025, 22:23It's a farce IF there was something suspicious and have been dealt with behind closed doors. Especially considering how rival teams and media handled it last time.AR3-GP wrote: ↑29 Oct 2025, 20:20I think the lack of transparency is poor. If Mercedes was in trouble, they would have wielded every tool in their arsenal to get out of it, I have no doubt. So I don't think the budget cap works if you can't actually trust that some teams could weasel their way out of trouble.
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2025/10 ... palo-alto/The other big news since Mexico is that the Cost Cap rumours regarding possible breaches have gone away. The word in the F1 Paddock for a couple of weeks has been that there was a problem with Mercedes AMG Petronas. In the end, nothing has happened. This is interesting. No teams deliberately breaks the F1 budget cap. In order for a breach to significantly impact performance, it would require a lot of money and the risk of punishment means it is not worth doing. More importantly reputational damage particularly for manufacturers is a big issue. Everyone errs on the side of caution. The rumours, which have been discussed quietly since Singapore, are based on the fact that there is still a level of interpretation of the Cost Cap rules. It is not clear why this is still happening and there is no transparency on these matters.
Transparency and FIA is a contradicting topic.
Emag wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 16:28
Can you please link some articles if you have the time. I don't remember seeing anything but rumors on social media. I really doubt this could have been "swept off under the rug" if it was as big of a deal as some people think. Toto did not let the thing go the entire year when we had the "catering-gate", I doubt any McLaren rivals would have let this go without making a fuss about it if there was indeed something to make a fuss about.
https://racer.com/2025/10/24/delay-made ... r-wheatley“I think the delay in announcing made it very clear to all of us that there were some teams in trouble – or a team in trouble perhaps,” Wheatley said when asked by RACER about the delay.
“I think the first thing I would say is that nobody’s doing it intentionally. You know, these things happen sometimes. Things can just get out of control a little bit – like a car crash, something like that – and unexpected costs late on. I don’t want to speculate on the cause of it. I think we now understand why we were late in getting the publication from the FIA.”
I think it's clear there were concerns inside the paddock just purely due to the delay in the issuing of the certificates. It's not like the FIA is perfect, but are they really that corrupt that someone (not saying who) can get away with major breaches of the cost cap regulations? I personally don't think so. Hard to throw ash in the eyes of all the other teams if nasty business is happening between one or two parties. The rumours of course went on fire upon hearing any conversations in the paddock. Rumours generate clicks and attention so it's expected the media (or in this case, a couple of individuals) would blow this thing out of proportion.AR3-GP wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 16:31Emag wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 16:28
Can you please link some articles if you have the time. I don't remember seeing anything but rumors on social media. I really doubt this could have been "swept off under the rug" if it was as big of a deal as some people think. Toto did not let the thing go the entire year when we had the "catering-gate", I doubt any McLaren rivals would have let this go without making a fuss about it if there was indeed something to make a fuss about.
https://racer.com/2025/10/24/delay-made ... r-wheatley“I think the delay in announcing made it very clear to all of us that there were some teams in trouble – or a team in trouble perhaps,” Wheatley said when asked by RACER about the delay.
“I think the first thing I would say is that nobody’s doing it intentionally. You know, these things happen sometimes. Things can just get out of control a little bit – like a car crash, something like that – and unexpected costs late on. I don’t want to speculate on the cause of it. I think we now understand why we were late in getting the publication from the FIA.”
Where were the public calls for transparency? I'm not naming any team. I just think the behavior from the usual suspects doesn't add up compared to last time around.
With Stella's latest aspersions, we know they still know how to speak up...
It seems the implication was that some of the teams might have had procedural breaches, not necessarily blatant cost cap breaches in itself. Ferrari would have had the most to gain if penalizations were applied. Since the matter was seemingly resolved without any further comments, this seems to me like whatever problem there was with whatever team, it was likely a procedural thing that was clarified.“It’s not a big deal to have the decision in September or October at the end of the day,” Vasseur said. “On this, we have to trust the FIA that they are doing their job. I think it’s not an easy one, honestly, but we also have to avoid making any speculation on rumors. That would be a mistake.
“If someone did a procedural breach, I think this can happen to everybody. It’s not a sporting advantage. We have to separate sporting advantage with a sporting penalty from a technical mistake or administrative issue. Let’s wait and see.”
You're making things out to be more black and white than they really are. The budget cap seems to work on some kind of bartering system with shifting interpretations, as alluded to by Joe Saward. There was a delay because of this. Teams interpreted certain items in new ways this year. Otherwise there would be no reason for a 2 month delay if everyone just submitted the same formats and exemptions from last year.Emag wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 16:50I think it's clear there were concerns inside the paddock just purely due to the delay in the issuing of the certificates. It's not like the FIA is perfect, but are they really that corrupt that someone (not saying who) can get away with major breaches of the cost cap regulations? I personally don't think so. Hard to throw ash in the eyes of all the other teams if nasty business is happening between one or two parties. The rumours of course went on fire upon hearing any conversations in the paddock. Rumours generate clicks and attention so it's expected the media (or in this case, a couple of individuals) would blow this thing out of proportion.AR3-GP wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 16:31Emag wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 16:28
Can you please link some articles if you have the time. I don't remember seeing anything but rumors on social media. I really doubt this could have been "swept off under the rug" if it was as big of a deal as some people think. Toto did not let the thing go the entire year when we had the "catering-gate", I doubt any McLaren rivals would have let this go without making a fuss about it if there was indeed something to make a fuss about.
https://racer.com/2025/10/24/delay-made ... r-wheatley“I think the delay in announcing made it very clear to all of us that there were some teams in trouble – or a team in trouble perhaps,” Wheatley said when asked by RACER about the delay.
“I think the first thing I would say is that nobody’s doing it intentionally. You know, these things happen sometimes. Things can just get out of control a little bit – like a car crash, something like that – and unexpected costs late on. I don’t want to speculate on the cause of it. I think we now understand why we were late in getting the publication from the FIA.”
Where were the public calls for transparency? I'm not naming any team. I just think the behavior from the usual suspects doesn't add up compared to last time around.
With Stella's latest aspersions, we know they still know how to speak up...
Going by what Vasseur had to say :It seems the implication was that some of the teams might have had procedural breaches, not necessarily blatant cost cap breaches in itself. Ferrari would have had the most to gain if penalizations were applied. Since the matter was seemingly resolved without any further comments, this seems to me like whatever problem there was with whatever team, it was likely a procedural thing that was clarified.“It’s not a big deal to have the decision in September or October at the end of the day,” Vasseur said. “On this, we have to trust the FIA that they are doing their job. I think it’s not an easy one, honestly, but we also have to avoid making any speculation on rumors. That would be a mistake.
“If someone did a procedural breach, I think this can happen to everybody. It’s not a sporting advantage. We have to separate sporting advantage with a sporting penalty from a technical mistake or administrative issue. Let’s wait and see.”
The thing is, this goes both ways. Of course, scandals are not in the best interest of the organization, but the real damage would mostly fall on whichever team is caught in violation rather than on the organization itself, which might also earn some praise for enforcing its rules. You also don’t want to establish yourself as an unfair or biased governing body. If that perception forms, newcomers and sponsors could easily walk away.AR3-GP wrote: ↑10 Nov 2025, 17:38You're making things out to be more black and white than they really are. The budget cap seems to work on some kind of bartering system with shifting interpretations, as alluded to by Joe Saward. There was a delay because of this. Teams interpreted certain items in new ways this year. Otherwise there would be no reason for a 2 month delay if everyone just submitted the same formats and exemptions from last year.
So there should have been more transparency.
Furthermore, it's no longer in the financial interest of the sport to have any more breaches or scandals. F1 just signed a big deal with Apple. Lots of new American sponsors. Like Vasseur/Wheatley said, no team at this stage would do anything intentionally. Did some get creative? Probably. It feels like things got smoothed over through negotiations. Toto Wolff had nothing to say the entire time, but he was a singing canary in 2022. Weird that he (nor Zak Brown) no longer wanted to screech and defend Formula 1 from it's evil-doers...unless it was his team under scrutiny as has been well understood at this point...they got away with something, we just don't know what. FIA helped Ferrari cover up something a few years ago. They are capable of absolutely anything with enough money thrown about.
